Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Soon: Derek Chauvin Trial Resumes after Dramatic Testimony; Rep. Gaetz Denies Relationship with 17-Year-Old. Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired March 31, 2021 - 06:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The story of what happened in Minneapolis told through the lens of eyewitnesses.

[05:59:16]

DONALD WILLIAMS, EYEWITNESS OF GEORGE FLOYD'S DEATH: We called the police on the police, because I believe I witnessed a murder.

GENEVIEVE HANSEN, EMT WHO WITNESSES GEORGE FLOYD'S DEATH: I would have been able to provide medical attention to the best of my abilities, and this human was denied that.

DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, CDC DIRECTOR (voice-over): I just can't face another surge when there's so much optimism right at our fingertips.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This past week, average new case counts are up 23 percent.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The younger group tends to believe that they are not at risk. They are putting themselves much more so in harm's way.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, March 31, 6 a.m. here in New York. John Berman is off. John Avlon is taking his last sip of coffee, that he will need this morning, before being here with me.

Great to have you.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST/ANCHOR: Buckle up.

CAMEROTA: OK. So this morning, prosecutors continue to build their case against Derek Chauvin after a day of emotional testimony from six witnesses who watched George Floyd die with a police officer's knee on his neck for nine minutes and 29 seconds.

A Minneapolis firefighter says she was desperate to help Floyd. She will be back on the stand again today. Four of the witnesses who testified Tuesday were younger than 18 at

the time of Floyd's death, including the teenager who recorded that now-infamous video of Floyd's final moments and her 9-year-old cousin. So we'll bring you all the key moments and what to expect ahead.

AVLON: We're also following a developing story about Republican Congressman and ardent Trump supporter Matt Gaetz. "New York Times" reporting that the Justice Department is investigating whether Gaetz had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl. And that may include sex trafficking charges.

Gaetz denies the allegations and is now claiming this is all part of an extortion scheme.

But we begin with the Derek Chauvin trial. CNN's Omar Jimenez live at the courthouse in Minneapolis with our top story -- Omar.

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Look, John, today is day 15 of the trial. And on the other side it was, without a doubt, the most emotional and contentious day of court we've had yet.

The story of what happened on May 25, 2020, was told through the lens of eyewitnesses, who were literal steps away from George Floyd as he was pinned under the knee of Derek Chauvin, and who in some cases now are still haunted by what they saw.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JIMENEZ (voice-over): Six eyewitnesses took the stand Tuesday, all recounting their feelings at the scene of George Floyd's death. Donald Williams, first on the stand, stood just feet away from Floyd in May. He was so disturbed from what he saw that he called 911 to report Derek Chauvin. Prosecutors played the audio from the call in court.

WILLIAMS: Y'all murders, bro. Y'all murderers.

I called the police on the police.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And why did you do that?

WILLIAMS: Because I believe I witnessed a murder.

JIMENEZ: As part of the contentious exchange, the defense argued that Williams and the rest of the crowd grew threatening, which they argued distracted the officers.

ERIC NELSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR DEREK CHAUVIN: You called him a tough guy.

WILLIAMS: I did.

NELSON: Those terms grew more and more angry. Would you agree with that?

WILLIAMS: They grew more and more pleading for life.

JIMENEZ: Other young witnesses echoed Williams' feelings, highlighting how what they saw has haunted them since May.

DARNELLA FRAZIER, EYEWITNESS OF GEORGE FLOYD'S DEATH: I stayed up apologizing and apologizing to George Floyd for not doing more.

I have a black father. I have a black brother. I have black friends. And I -- I look at that, and I look at how that could have been one of them.

JIMENEZ: That was then-17-year-old Darnella Frazier. She recorded the now-infamous video showing some of the final moments of Floyd's life. She testified, along with her 9-year-old cousin, who was also at the scene. They both appeared via audio only, given their ages at the time of the incident.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What was it about the scene that caused you to come back?

FRAZIER: It wasn't right. He was -- he was suffering. He was in pain.

J.R., 9-YEAR-OLD WITNESS TO GEORGE FLOYD'S DEATH: I saw the officer put a knee on George Floyd. I was sad and kind of mad.

JIMENEZ: She testified that, even after paramedics arrived and tried to check Floyd's pulse, Chauvin's knee remained on Floyd's neck.

FRAZIER: The paramedic did like a motion like get up, telling him -- basically telling him to remove his knee. His knee was still there, even when they came, even at the end, even unresponsive.

JIMENEZ: Off-duty firefighter and trained EMT Genevieve Hansen took the stand last, telling the court she tried to intervene to provide medical assistance to Floyd.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you really a firefighter?

HANSEN: Yes, I am. For Minneapolis.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, OK. Well, then get off the sidewalk.

HANSEN: Show me his pulse.

I would have been able to provide medical attention to the best of my abilities, and this human was denied that right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you couldn't do that, how did that make you feel?

HANSEN: Totally distressed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Were you frustrated?

HANSEN: Yes.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JIMENEZ: And emotions were running high throughout the day. On the other end of the spectrum, at one point, the judge had to even

scold that witness for arguing with the defense attorney, as he had do with an earlier witness during the day, as well.

But court ended yesterday in the middle of her testimony, so that's where they'll pick things up when court gets back into session later this morning -- Alisyn.

[06:05:07]

CAMEROTA: Omar, thank you very much for covering all of that for us.

Joining us now, CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson. He's a criminal defense attorney. Also with us, retired Los Angeles police sergeant Cheryl Dorsey.

Sergeant Dorsey, I want to start with you. It was riveting. It was riveting yesterday to watch that. I really couldn't turn away, those witnesses who also -- compelling, and it was very striking to hear how many people who just happened upon that incident felt compelled to call the police, because what they were seeing wasn't right.

I mean, all of these were people who have seen, you know, some sort of exchanges before. Certainly, the EMT has seen police encounters before, but that moment to them, they all felt compelled to call the police, because what they were seeing didn't make sense to them.

CHERYL DORSEY, RETIRED LAPD SERGEANT: You know, much like we heard from the 911 dispatcher, all very compelling. And listen, people talking, jeering at officers from the sidelines, is not anything that's uncommon. It's inherent to police work, as a firefighter alluded to.

And we're dealing with a 19-year veteran in Derek Chauvin, and so he's not new to any of this. And for the defense attorney to infer that anything that was happening on the sidewalk was somehow disconcerting and took him out of his game, if you will, is intellectually dishonest. This is a tenured, veteran sergeant who used his feet, as we see in the video, to add additional pressure to the neck of Mr. Floyd for over nine minutes. It's outrageous.

AVLON: Joey, that's where I want to take this for you. Because you're obviously a defense attorney, and we've seen the defense attorneys in this case demonize the victim and now trying to demonize the witnesses. I want to play for you a clip and get your take on whether this is a wise strategy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NELSON: Do you recall saying, "I dare you to touch me like that. I swear I'll slap the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) -- the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) out of both of you"?

WILLIAMS: Yes, I did.

NELSON: So again, sir, it's fair to say you grew angrier and angrier? WILLIAMS: No. I grew professional and professional. I stayed in my

body. You can't make me out to be angry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: And we can all recognize that as the angry black man accusation. Witness not having any of it. What's your take on that strategy and the possibility of blowback from the jury?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: My take on it is that, listen, I understand and I get that everyone does differently. No one has a monopoly on wisdom. I'm not going to suggest that, you know, look, I'm this great person who would do greater things.

But I'm going to tell you this. The fact of the matter is that what you argue has to make sense. If you are arguing that this crowd is angry, that you were so concerned that they were deflecting from you, what do you do? What does a logical person do? You get the person out of there. Right?

To me, from an evidentiary point of view, if someone's angry and I'm concerned about this crowd of, oh, a 17-year-old. Were you concerned about her? Were you concerned about the 9-year-old who testified? Were you concerned about the other two minors that testified? Were you concerned about the paramedic who wanted to render aid and was desperate to do so? So it's inconsistent from any of the evidence.

But the most inconsistent part of it as I sit there is, if you're so concerned about the angry crowd, get your knee off of his neck, get him into an ambulance, or your car or somewhere else, and get him out of there. And the fact that they don't do that is really problematic, and it just goes against the nature of human nature. And therefore, I just don't think it resonates with the jury. At the end of the day, what you argue has to, and if it doesn't, it's a failure.

CAMEROTA: Sergeant Dorsey, what about the fact that he -- that George Floyd was in handcuffs? I mean, he was already, you know, powerless, basically. And -- and the fact that the -- Chauvin's attorney is trying to argue this is what they're trained for, I mean, that's not what the firefighter, the EMT thought. Because she's, again, seen lots of this. How can that be what they're trained for?

DORSEY: Well, you know, they're trying to construct a narrative and tell us what you saw. And so let me tell you what we saw.

We saw Derek Chauvin arrive on scene and put black gloves on. And police officers put on black leather gloves, it's because they're about to put in work.

Mr. Floyd was in the back of a police car. They took him out of the police car, put him on the ground so that they could inflict punishment on him.

As to what Joey said, if it was a problem, all they had to do was leave him in the back of the car and drive off. They took him out of the police car, put him on the ground to do just what they did. And the questions the defense attorney is asking is not evidence, but

certainly, the response from those eyewitnesses should hold much more weight than the question of the defense attorney.

AVLON: Joey, you made the point very clearly what the defense attorney needs to argue needs to make sense, all right? And I want to ask, putting yourself in the position of the defense attorney, looking at this fact pack: George Floyd is in handcuffs. EMT is saying, This man is in distress. The crowd is saying, Get off his neck, he's not breathing. It's been nine minutes.

How, as a defense attorney, can you justify this as a reasonable use of force, given all that evidence?

JACKSON: I think it's with great difficult that you do that. But then, again, defense attorneys are always operating in the realm of very difficult facts.

In my view, this is a theory, how I would construct it. There's three pillars to the case. No. 1 is cause of death. The fact is, is that no one, right, unless you're a doctor can opine as to cause of death. If you're going to argue that it was a preexisting condition, it was COVID, there were drugs in his system, there were all of these things, then you're going to make that argument.

You're going to argue that there was no bruising. There's no evidence of restricted breathing. Then you make the argument through medical evidence, and you talk to the witnesses about that. You don't know how he died. You don't know what the medical examiner indicated, do you? You don't know about -- Stick with that, because that now relates to your theory.

You want to pivot to self-defense, talk to them about you're not familiar with police procedure. You don't know police protocols. You're not at all understanding of the nature of police work, are you? Stick with that.

And then if you want to demonize, which you have to, to some degree, George Floyd, then you go to the issue. You don't know how he got to the ground. You don't know what the issues were. You don't know how non-compliant he was.

But to be blaming crowds, and, you know, dealing with all these other things, it's just problematic, and it doesn't make sense. And to me, things have to make sense.

And finally, John, to a jury, things have to make sense, and if they don't, again, you're not doing your job.

CAMEROTA: Joey Jackson, Sergeant Dorsey, thank you both very much.

Now to this developing story. Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, reportedly under investigation for possible sex trafficking. What he is saying about it. He spoke a lot about this last night. We have it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[06:16:13]

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): It is a horrible allegation, and it is a lie. "The New York Times" is running a story that I have traveled with a 17-year-old woman, and that is verifiably false. People can look at my travel records and see that that is not the case.

What is happening is an extortion of me and my family involving a former Department of Justice official.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz is denying having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl. "The New York Times" reports that the Justice Department opened an investigation into Gaetz in the final months of the Trump administration.

CNN's Lauren Fox, live on Capitol Hill with all the details -- Lauren.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John. This is right.

Yesterday "The New York Times" reporting that the Department of Justice, when Bill Barr was still the attorney general, opened this investigation into Congressman Matt Gaetz about whether or not he had had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old woman and whether or not he had traveled across state lines with her, which could potentially be a charge of sex trafficking.

Now, you saw there, Gaetz is denying this allegation fervently, and he is arguing that, actually, his family was part of a potential threat here from a former Department of Justice official, who he says was trying to get millions of dollars out of he and his father in an effort to make this investigation go away.

Now, Gaetz has leveled these allegations against this former Department of Justice official, saying that he and his father were so concerned about it that they went to the FBI, and his father agreed to wear a wire to try to catch this individual.

During that FOX News interview last night, Gaetz actually named this person as David McGee, a former prosecutor for the Justice Department.

Now, McGee has issued a statement to "The Washington Post," fervently denying these allegations. And I want to read you that statement. We should also say that CNN has also reached out to David McGee. He says, quote, "It is completely false. It is a blatant attempt to distract from the fact that he's under investigation for sex trafficking of minors. I have no connection with the case at all, other than one of a thousand people who have heard the rumors."

We should also say that CNN has confirmed that this investigation into Gaetz started as a probe into a larger investigation into a former Florida politician who the Department of Justice was investigating. Gaetz has said he is the subject of this investigation, but not the target of it.

CNN has continued to reach out to the Department of Justice, which says that they cannot confirm or deny the existence of an investigation -- John.

AVLON: OK, Lauren. Subject, target. Accusations, denials. There is a lot going on here.

Joining us now to make sense of it all, CNN political analyst Margaret Talev, who's managing editor at Axios. Also with us, CNN legal analyst Elie Honig, who's a former state and federal prosecutor.

All right, guys. Let's try to break this down. Margaret, beginning with you, look, Matt Gaetz is a lightning rod for controversy, but there's a lot going on in this flurry of accusations. How do you see it and make sense of it?

MARGARET TALEV, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, John, good morning.

I mean, look, these are incredibly serious allegations about a sitting member of Congress. I just think you get to take a pause and think about this is truly unusual.

And to have someone who is under this kind of investigation punch back so aggressively, do his own kind of going offense with, essentially, a media tour to not only defend himself but deny all of it, come up with sort of a counter theory, is also extraordinary and highly unusual.

Why does this matter, other than the actual allegations at hand? (AUDIO GAP) he say are shocking, on both counts. Shock opposing the allegations about what the investigation touching on him is about. His own explanation, this extortion scheme that he is alleging. Also extraordinary.

[06:20:11]

But why is this important? This is one of former President Trump's closest defenders. This is one of the most controversial members of Congress. He's a lightning rod for controversy. The two parties are neck and neck to try to -- Republicans want to recapture the majority in the midterms. Think of all these other issues. This could impact all of that.

And because it's an investigation, it's undoubtedly going to dig into all kinds of correspondence touching on other members of Congress and people and politicians and associates in Florida. Email, Twitter, telephone calls, text messages, communications.

And this is all tied, it appears, to another case about a different former public official in Florida who has been indicted on child sexual allegations.

CAMEROTA: Elie, can we just zero in on the sex aspect here, since that's what grabbed my attention? AVLON: Really?

CAMEROTA: I mean, frankly, this is very convoluted, but here's the part that I understand. Matt Gaetz last night was very quick to say he's never traveled with a 17-year-old: "It's demonstrably true that I didn't travel a 17-year-old." What if he had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old? Is that against the law?

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: He could be in real trouble if the facts play out that way.

My first reaction to all this is Matt Gaetz ought to think hard about invoking his Fifth Amendment rights. I mean, he went on Tucker Carlson's show last night and made some astonishing admissions. You can see that from Carlson's astonished reaction.

Look, there's a lot of facts we don't know here, but it is a federal crime, and a serious federal crime with a 10-year mandatory minimum punishment, to transport or travel with a person under 18 across state lines for the purpose of having a commercial sex act. If that's what happened here, Matt Gaetz is in a lot of trouble.

A couple of things that I think are important here. The timing really sticks out to me. The fact that this investigation was started months ago under the Trump administration, that's important for two reasons. One, he can't claim he's being politically targeted by DOJ. He was the Trump administration's biggest cheerleader.

And two, the timing is important here, because Gaetz said last night on FOX that his family was first contacted in what he describes as an extortion attempt a couple weeks ago, in mid-March.

But we know that the criminal investigation predates that significantly. So it sort of strains credulity this idea this is all based off this so-called extortion attempt. DOJ had been looking at this well before that.

AVLON: All right. Margaret, there is scandal, and then there is substance, and I want to make sure we hit on some of that.

Today, President Biden is going to announce one of the most ambitious infrastructure bills ever put forward in American history. This thing is mammoth: over $2 trillion. And I want to go through some of the contents and then talk about the politics of it.

Two point two five trillion direct spending. Four hundred billion dollars, clean energy tax credits. Six hundred and fifty, physical infrastructure. Three hundred billion in housing -- housing infrastructure. We've got 300 billion for electrical grid. This thing is massive.

So my question to you, Margaret, is this. You know, there was a time when Democrats were worried about being called "tax and spend" by Republicans. That seems to be out the window. The Biden team seems to be betting big that they can make a dent in the economy, and even win over some Republican voters by going big with spending.

Is that how you see it?

TALEV: I think you're right about that. And you mentioned $2 trillion. Of course, ultimately, this infrastructure offering would -- could be twice that much money, but they're going to break it into pieces so that it doesn't sound quite as big as it's ultimately going to be.

But that's exactly right. And there are two reasons why Democrats and Biden are more comfortable with this. One is the COVID crisis, because there's already so many trillions of dollars out the door and in the works, that it's, I think, from their perspective, easy to make the argument what's another $2 or 4 trillion when we're already spending?

But the other is that President Trump, his predecessor, got the Republican Party a lot more comfortable with spending that would increase the debt without being offset.

And so there's this combination of political acclamation on the other side of the aisle and the urgency -- and not just the urgency of the COVID moment, but the money already out the door and in progress. If the nation is going to take on that much debt anyway, Biden's argument is, this is the moment to tackle the roads, the bridges, the broadband that Americans on both sides of the aisle have desperately wanted, whether you're a rural American, whether you live in the city, whether you're a healthcare worker, whether you're a senior citizen who wants care at home, you know, that these are things that have bipartisan appeal that it's been decades in the meeting.

You remember we had infrastructure week every week for 52 weeks for the last two presidents. It's never happened. And Biden is right now trying to capture people's imagination. It's an aspirational message.

Where it gets much harder is where you talk about how it's going to be paid for. And as the days proceed, you're going to see a lot of discussion about the fact that they're talking about 15-year plans to pay for things that are going to roll out the door over the course of, perhaps, eight years half the time, with the congressional budgeting process only goes out a decade. So they're going to have trouble convincing, you know, accountants and -- and projectors of data that any of this actually adds up to anything close to three or four trillion dollars.

And there's another revolt in states with high tax rates like New York, New Jersey, California, to try to get that SALT tax. Remember, the state and local taxes that Trump capped as part of last time around's tax deal, to try to get those reinstated. If that were to happen on any level, it would totally erode the revenue that Biden is talking about raising. So it's pretty complicated.

CAMEROTA: We're going to bring all of this up with Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, as soon as she comes on our program. Elie, Margaret, thank you both very much.

So this morning, there's growing concern about cases of coronavirus in children. When could children start being vaccinated? CNN is going to speak with a family that is participating in Moderna's children's vaccine trial. What have they learned? Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)